Specials

Wednesday, March 14, 2012

String of Consciousness Part Four: Postmodernism

So here
is the thing. The use of alchemy in literature is a pre modern one.
Shakespeare uses it Chaucer uses it, in fact it is almost a medieval
technique. And they were using it to combat nominalism. Which divided
an object from it's nature, or that names and ideas do not have any
correspondence in reality. Alchemy is as John Granger puts it when he
quotes Burckhardt's summary of Alchemy as “to make of the body a
spirit and of the spirit a body.” this seems a perfectly good
reaction to the nominalism which seeks to dived what we could call
Platonic forms from a physical reality. And I can see how nominalism
grew into Postmodernism considering that Deconstructionism is one of
the most important parts of the forming of postmodernism. (quick note
I have read very little of Derrida). So here is my question, are
these current popular authors criticizing Postmodernism, or
advocating it? As I listened to the conversation between Prinzi and
Granger I was unsure if they themselves were advocates of
postmodernism or not.

Now
if the anti-nominalists used the Alchemical form of story telling to
criticizes the nominalists does Rowling, Meyer, and Collins use it to
criticizes Postmodernism? Those of course are the authors that Prinzi
and Granger were discussing who uses literary alchemy. I think that
they are saying that these authors are using the world view of
postmodernism -at least the idea that those who are an the fringes of
society are the real heroes- to give critic the world view. Now at
this point I must admit that I haven't read Twilight or the Hunger
Games. I tried to read Twilight but was pretty much not interested
then as I read the cliff notes because everyone was reading it I
pretty much joined the twilight is bad literature camp. I may read
the Hunger Games some time in the near-ish future.

Modernism
said that science tells us everything we need to know. Postmodernism
tells us that the only thing we can know is what is scientifically
verifiable, and anything else should be held in suspect because we
can not know anything else. Postmodernism goes farther to say that
everything we think we know is a meta narrative and all meta
narratives are wrong. To the point were Granger pointed out that the
only value in postmodernism is Tolerance. The worst thing someone can
be called is one of the many ists in the world. (racist, Sexist,
classist) to the point that as long as a mass murderer isn't
prejudice then he is alright.

And yet
as Prinzi points out in the conversation humanity still wants
something that is true, good, and beautiful. And that is at least
what Harry Potter does. The protagonists are those that society has
over looked, the werewolf, the escaped prisoner, the Mudbloods, the
Squibs, the house elves, the Centaurs. There is something subversive
in the books against what the meta narrative of the Death Eaters and
the Ministry of Magic.

However
in all this mess they lost me. I think their final point on this was
that Rowling and Meyer (at the time of this conversation the last
book of the Hunger Games wasn't out yet) use the world view of the
post modern to show that there is truth, good, and beauty in the
world that is joined with reality and not separated from it. Or at
least that is why these authors use alchemy. Which makes sense, I'm
just not sure the logic of how this conversation went from a to b.
Plus I've wondered at the concept of Harry potter as a postmodern
fairy tale.

Like I
said I really consider myself a medievalist in a lot of ways mostly
because I see that as nominalism, modernism, postmodernism moved form
one to the other they continued to move away from the understanding
that we are both body and spirit. It reminds me of several things
C.S. Lewis talks about in his book the Screwtape Letters. He tells
wormwood to remember that his patient is both body and spirit, but he
must keep the material always in the mind of the patient. Not to let
him think about how the material effects his spirit. And to always
keep real life or what is best to call real life before the patient's
eyes. Oh and of course to keep him form questioning what real life
is. I can see that this is what alchemy tries to defend against.
Seeing our selves as purely material or purely spiritual (which would
be the other extreme but not the extreme which is currently
prevailing in culture)

however
to wrap this back around to Harry Potter, Twilight, the Hunger Games
I am a bit at a loss. Harry Potter in the Deathly Hollows is most
definitely affirming non material truths. That we are indeed more
then just material. Hunger Games talks much about the formation of
Katniss's soul and her questioning of what it means for her to have a
soul. If the Twilight series does this as well I guess I would need
some one to show me how it does.

I don't
know if this section of my consciousness makes any sense. But then
that might be the fact that it is revolving around postmodernism
which at it's heart doesn't want to be understood. I hope my rambling sounds like something coherent.